Diplomats:U.S. Alone in Fight to Oust UN's ElBaradei

[cal04]

The United States is alone on the board of the U.N. nuclear watchdog in opposing a third term for agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei, diplomats said Wednesday. Heeding a U.S. request, the 35-nation governing board of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agencydelayed a decision until June on whether to give ElBaradei a third term at the high-profile agency, which he has headed since 1997.

``The United States is the only country against ElBaradei,'' a diplomat said on condition of anonymity.

The United States, which supported ElBaradei in 1997, turned against him because of what it sees as a lack of cooperation in Iraq and Iran, while most IAEA members see him as the only reasonable choice for a job no one else has come forward for.

Allies Canada and Australia have deserted Washington and are pressuring the Americans to accept the 62-year-old Egyptian lawyer for another 4-year team. A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, denied that Washington had a vendetta against ElBaradei but confirmed that the United States still wanted him out. He said ElBaradei had ``served with distinction'' but added that Washington believed ``heads of U.N. organizations should serve no more than two terms.''


http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-nuclear-elbaradei.html

[otohara]

1. The World Is Fed Up

they are tired of being ordered around by neocon's in The White House, are pushing back and showing a growing independence from US.

[Spazito]

2. Good! The reason the US (bush admin) wants him out

is because he dared to tell the truth about the WMDs, or rather the lack of WMDs, in Iraq. Could this be yet another indication that the world is not going to support any requests from the US as long as the bush cabal is in power?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

3. ElBaradei refused to lie for the NeoCons and support the idea that...

...Iraq had WMDs. He also refused to go along with the contention that Iran had operable nuclear weapons.

The NeoCons just hate truth no matter where it exists.

[mutus_frutex]

4. Is that the only excuse they can give?

That they think people should have only two terms? Pretty flimsy.

One more thing that is interesting is that the people in the article suggest that the delay might be related to the delay in confirming Bolton. So, things are getting pretty clear to me: Bolton was supposed to be confirmed, get ElBaradei out and start pushing the IAEA on Iran.

[Moderator]

5. kick to combine

[Up2Late]

6. Diplomats: U.S. Alone in Fight to Oust UN's El Baradei

Diplomats: U.S. Alone in Fight to Oust UN's ElBaradei

Wed Apr 27, 2005 12:11 PM ET

By Louis Charbonneau

VIENNA (Reuters) - The United States is alone on the board of the U.N. nuclear watchdog in opposing a third term for agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei, diplomats said Wednesday. Heeding a U.S. request, the 35-nation governing board of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) delayed a decision until June on whether to give ElBaradei a third term at the high-profile agency, which he has headed since 1997. "The United States is the only country against ElBaradei," a diplomat said on condition of anonymity.

The United States, which supported ElBaradei in 1997, turned against him because of what it sees as a lack of cooperation in Iraq and Iran, while most IAEA members see him as the only reasonable choice for a job no one else has come forward for. Allies Canada and Australia have deserted Washington and are pressuring the Americans to accept the 62-year-old Egyptian lawyer for another 4-year team. A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, denied that Washington had a vendetta against ElBaradei but confirmed that the United States still wanted him out. He said ElBaradei had "served with distinction" but added that Washington believed "heads of U.N. organizations should serve no more than two terms."

Diplomats said the U.S. wanted to delay the decision for two reasons. First, it wants to make one last attempt to get the 12 votes necessary to block ElBaradei's re-election in June, which diplomats in Vienna say will be very difficult for Washington. But Washington also wants to see how its nomination of hawkish former U.S. Undersecretary of State for arms control John Bolton to the post of U.S. ambassador to the United Nations in New York plays out, they said. "The U.S. doesn't want a vote until it's clear what happens with Bolton," a diplomat on the IAEA board said.

The nomination has bogged down over allegations that Bolton, an outspoken U.N. critic, tried to bully State Department intelligence analysts to tailor their work to suit his hard-line political views and that he was abusive to junior officials. The U.S. official denied there was any link between Bolton's nomination difficulties and ElBaradei's re-election. Although the U.S. mission to the IAEA would be answerable to the State Department, few diplomats on the agency's board believe Bolton would keep his hands entirely off the IAEA if he was confirmed to the post.

© Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. (Photo at link above)

[Roland99]

7. Is the U.S. filibustering against ElBaradei??

[Kimber Scott]

8. Seems we're alone in a lot of things now... nt

[Moderator]

9. kick to combine

[norml]

10. IAEA delays ElBaradei reappointment

Posted on Wed, Apr. 27, 2005





IAEA delays ElBaradei reappointment

GEORGE JAHN

Associated Press


VIENNA, Austria - The United States opposed the reappointment of the U.N.'s top nuclear inspector Wednesday because of his views on Iran and prewar Iraq, prompting the atomic watchdog agency to delay its decision to avoid a confrontation with Washington and other members.

The board of the International Atomic Energy Agency has until June to decide whether to reappoint Mohamed ElBaradei to a third term. At a brief meeting Wednesday, the board postponed a decision on the reappointment.

Wednesday's deferral was aimed at avoiding a vote that would pit the United States against most of the 34 other board nations. Traditionally, decisions are reached through consensus.

U.S. officials refused to comment on the meeting. But a Western diplomat familiar with the U.S. position said they were weighing their options before June and hoping to swing traditional allies to muster the minimum of 12 votes needed to block ElBaradei.



snip



http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/11504338.htm

[MrModerate]

11. Damn that arrogant sonuvabitch!

How dare Baradei tell the truth about Iran and Iraq. We gotta take him down!

Heck, but Bolton in after his nomination fails -- I don't think he'd have to pass the Senate then . . . and Bolton's success with former-Soviet nuke demilitarization is so overwhelming, how could anyone oppose him?